Posted on 12/14/2010 9:25:59 AM PST by Smokeyblue
An Army doctor who disobeyed orders to deploy to Afghanistan because he questions Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has pleaded guilty to 1 of 2 charges against him.
At a court-martial proceeding Tuesday in Maryland, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin of Greeley, Colo., pleaded guilty to not meeting with a superior when ordered to do so and not showing up at Fort Campbell in Kentucky where he was supposed to report.
(Excerpt) Read more at wkrn.com ...
The legal authority to deploy forces rests with the Secretary of Defense.
Oh you mean, this?? "CCDRs reported directly to the United States Secretary of Defense, and through him to the President of the United States."
link to Ask.com definition of combatant commander
Thanks. That reinforces my point.
Really? Please show me the "White House directive" that ordered Lakin to do anything.
No problem: "President Barack Obama authorized an additional 17,000 troops to "surge" into Afghanistan for Operation Enduring Freedom in February ..."
Link to Air Force story
Two of Lakin's orders were in support of OEF.
Again, "combatant commander" is going to help you a whole bunch.
It did, thanks for falling on the sword for me.
Back to Lakin, how do you feel about him perjuring himself when he swore under oath that his orders to deploy were lawful? Has he exposed himself to even more charges, in your birther mind?
The judge declared his orders to be lawful. Whether she was accurate or not, it appears he was using that as a basis for his statement and not necessarily his personal beliefs which he was incorrectly told to be irrelevant To say otherwise could have potentially put him in contempt of court.
Did you admit to having never served?
Obama can delegate the authority to Gates to send troops to Afghanistan but ultimately as Commander in Chief he is responsible for that order not Gates, that’s why it says he must obtain the approval of the president, he is getting his orders from the Commander in Chief.
Obama ordered 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, it was Gates job to make it happen.
Many civilians don’t understand the difference between authority and responsibility in the military. Obama as Commander in Chief is responsible for every order given in the military, everyone below him gets their authority from him that’s why they call it the Chain of Command.
There were witnesses as prescribed by law when LBJ took the oath of office.
United States Code, Title 5, I believe, stipulates the requirements for administering an oath.
Obama couldn’t take the oath all by himself. So the scenario you provide is unrealistic.
From CAAFlog, for those who aren’t aware of the court martial sentencing phase process:
During sentencing deliberations, the members (jury) may each propose a sentence. The sentences are then voted on in ascending order – i.e., from the most lenient to the most severe. Once a proposed sentence receives at least a 2/3-rds vote, that becomes the sentence of the court. There are different rules in capital cases and cases in which the possibility of confinement exceeds ten years, but those rules don’t apply here.
There are eight members of this court-martial. To reach the two-thirds threshold requires six votes.
"A military court may punish for contempt a person subject to this code who wilfully and unlawfully refuses to be sworn or to affirm as a witness or who refuses to answer a legal or proper question ..."
I asked a question and I thought I did so respectfully. I know who Jim Robinson is. I didn’t know “the gloves” are off on “eligibility threads.” Why is that? Is there some reason to personally attack a person who merely speaks her mind and does so very well and when she does speak in haste and emotion, she profusely and humbly apologizes? Is there something about eligibility that means people don’t have to be polite to each other?
Freedom of speech?
“A military court may punish for contempt a person subject to this code who wilfully and unlawfully refuses to be sworn or to affirm as a witness or who refuses to answer a legal or proper question ...”
He did that in open Court after meeting with the Judge and convincing her that he wanted to plead guilty to four of the charges specified against him and that he understood the legal ramifications of pleading guilty.
Judge Lind then dismissed one of the charges against LTC. Lakin as duplicative even though he had pleaded guilty to it.
No, I have never served.
I understand what the chain of command is.
However, the law (Title 10) stipulates that the authority to deploy forces rests with the Secretary of Defense. He doesn’t require an order from the President to do so. He requires approval. There’s a difference between the two. One is a direct command to act and the other is permission to act.
Congress approves the use of force. Congress does not order the deployment of forces. The President approves a “force structure.” He doesn’t order the deployment of forces. The Secretary of Defense orders the deployment of forces.
That’s what the law says.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. re-administers the oath of office to
President Obama in the Map Room. (By Pete Souza -- White House)
Reporters were only alerted to Roberts's presence when one of them overheard
Obama's adviser, David Axelrod, in a conversation in a corridor.
Four reporters were invited to witness the second ceremony, along
with a photographer. Also present were Axelrod, Robert Gibbs, the White
House press secretary, and Greg Craig, the White House counsel.
I'd pay particular attention to that phrase. If you read it enough, it just might sink in, sport.
Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech.
JR is not congress, and congress does not own FR.
Day Two Wrap-up.
From: http://www.caaflog.com/2010/12/15/united-states-v-lakin-liveblogging-day-two-wrap/
“The defense and prosecution have now rested their sentencing cases in the Lakin court-martial.
The prosecution finished its case by playing an interview with LTC Lakin on the Bary Farber show, in which the accused discussed his rationale for violating orders and refusing to deploy. The money quote from the interview came when Farber asked Lakin whether, if he had it all to do over again, would he still refuse to deploy. Lakin’s answer was that yes, he would.
The defense presented two witnesses: an O-6 who deployed with LTC Lakin previously, and a CW3 who had also served with the accused, both of whom testified to his professional qualities and character. Lakin then gave an unsworn statement in question-and-answer format, taking more than an hour to explain his conduct. He said he understands the Army is not the place to get answers to his questions, and admitted that he made the wrong call in thinking it was. He was in tears during parts of his unsworn, and said he would prefer jail time to dismissal from the service.
Colonel Sullivan reports that Lakin’s attorney, Neal Puckett, asked tough questions: you asked for this court-martial, didn’t you? Are you proud of what you’ve done? LTC Lakin said he was not proud, and that if he had it all to do over again, he would not actually refuse to deploy — in fact, he would deploy tomorrow, if he could. He denied having ever said ”you had your chance” — that statement, he said, came from his former counsel, Paul Jensen.
The court is in recess until tomorrow. The prosecution will have an opportunity to put on a rebuttal case, if it chooses, and the defense can surrebut. The military judge will discuss sentencing instructions with counsel out of the presence of the members and then both sides will give argument. Judge Lind will instruct the members and they will retire to deliberate on a sentence. Barring the unexpected, the trial will end tomorrow.”
No, Congress delegated that authority by law (Title 10) to the Secretary of Defense. The President must approve the SecDef's deployment plans but he doesn't order the SecDef to deploy or delegate authority to the SecDef to deploy.
So what you are saying the is that the secretary of defense can send troops anywhere he wants to as long as the president approves it, even Iran?
and that those orders from the Secretary of Defense don’t come from the president since he is not in the chain of command because he only approves them...
Like when Truman only approved the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, he did not actually order it done he merely approved of it someone else was actually responsible for the order to drop the bomb...
Once authorized by the Congress to use force, the President decides how many forces he will commit to the operation.
Congress granted the Secretary of Defense, via Title 10, the authority to deploy forces. He must obtain approval of his plans from the President to ensure that his plans fall within the committments defined by the President.
But the actual deployment orders come directly from the Secretary of Defense based upon recommendations submitted to him by the Secretary of the Army (or other force) and the Chief of Staff of the Army (or other force).
The President has the authority under the AUMF to commit our forces to combat operations. If the President decides he wants to commit forces to Iran, he will stipulate how many he wants to commit. The Secretary of Defense then has the authority and responsibility under the law to deploy forces according to those committments.
It would be pretty sweet if he were though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.